At one business session Miss Laura Clay (Ky.) argued that the time had come to change the form of the Federal Suffrage Amendment to meet the objections of the southern members of Congress. Discussion showed a preponderance of sentiment in favor of the old amendment and the convention so voted, but at the suggestion of Mrs. Park it empowered the Congressional Committee to make any minor changes which might seem advisable. At another session there was considerable talk of merging the National American Association into the new organization of voters and dropping its name at this convention, but Miss Hay carried the delegates with her in urging that they retain the old name until they celebrated Miss Anthony's one-hundredth birthday and were safely through the ratification of the Federal Amendment. This decision was especially pleasing to the older members for whom the name had many endearing memories. Mrs. Catt announced that suffrage societies had been formed in Cuba, Porto Rico, Hawaii and the Philippines and it was voted to extend an official invitation to them to join the National Association without payment of dues. Mrs. Catt called attention to the increased educational value of the convention through the many opportunities extended to the delegates for addressing bodies of various kinds in the city. These included the churches, synagogues, Ethical Society, public schools, Chamber of Commerce, Junior Chamber of Commerce, City Club, Rotary Club, Town Club, Wednesday Club, Women's Trade Union League and other organizations.

One of the leading features of the convention was the report of Mrs. Maud Wood Park, chairman of the Congressional Committee, which gave a complete summary of the status of the Federal Suffrage Amendment in Congress from the time of the last convention to the present. This and Mrs. Shuler's secretary's report offer so comprehensive a survey of the important work of the National Association that a considerable amount of space is devoted to them. The report of Mrs. Park filled over thirty pages of the Handbook of the convention and was an interesting account of the struggle of the past year and a half to secure from Congress the submission of the Federal Suffrage Amendment. A large part of it will be found in the chapter devoted to that amendment. It showed the work done at the national headquarters in New York City and Washington and also in the States and gave an idea of the tremendous effort which was necessary before the measure was sent to the Legislatures for ratification. It told of the House Judiciary Committee reporting the resolution on Dec. 11, 1917, "without recommendation," after amending it so as to limit the time for ratification to seven years, and of the determination of the opponents to force a vote on it before the appointment of a Woman Suffrage Committee for which the friends were striving. This committee was announced, however, on December 13, 1917.

All the members but three of the committee were in favor of the amendment. Chairman Raker introduced a new resolution omitting the seven-year clause and the committee gave a five-days' hearing to the National American Association, the National Woman's Party and the Anti-Suffrage Association, January 3-7 inclusive. The committee made a favorable report to the House on January 8. On the 9th twelve Democratic members called by appointment on President Wilson, who advised the submission of the amendment. Speaker Clark gave valuable assistance, as did many prominent Democrats and Republicans both in and out of Congress. A five-hours' debate took place in the House on the afternoon of Jan. 10, 1918, and the vote resulted as follows:

In FavorOpposed
Republicans16533
Democrats104102
Miscellaneous51
274136

This was a majority of less than one vote over the necessary two-thirds.

Mrs. Park gave a graphic account of the struggle to secure a favorable vote in the Senate. She described the influences brought to bear from all possible sources; the conferences with committees and individuals; the fixing and then postponing of days for a vote; the difficulty in arranging "pairs"; the "filibustering" of the opponents, the adjournments, the endless tactics for preventing a vote which for years had been employed against this amendment. She described the great five days' discussion in the Senate September 26-October 1; the appeal to President Wilson for help and his magnificent response in person on September 30 with its contemptuous treatment by the opponents; the failure of the Republican leaders to supply the thirty-three votes promised and of the Democrats to provide from their ranks the thirty-fourth, which would complete the necessary two-thirds, and she gave the summary of the result of the balloting on October 1. Analyzed by parties and including pairs the vote stood:

YesNo
Democrats3022
Republicans3212
Total6234

The amendment was lost by two votes. This debate, printed in full in the Congressional Record for those days, hands down to posterity the noble effort of some members of the U. S. Senate to grant to women a voice in the Government to which they were giving the most loyal and devoted service in this hour when it was joining with other nations in the greatest battle for democracy ever fought. It preserves also the determination of other U. S. Senators to deny them this citizen's right and to continue their disfranchised condition. The Woman Citizen, official organ of the National American Woman Suffrage Association, in its issue of Oct. 5, 1918, gave a spirited account of the proceedings of those momentous five days.

Mrs. Park took up the story after the defeat in the Senate and said in part: "The election returns on Nov. 6, 1918, indicated that the necessary two-thirds majority in the 66th Congress had been secured. This belief was shared by prominent Democrats, who from that time on spared no effort to make unfriendly Democratic Senators realize the folly of their position in leaving the victory for a Republican Congress. Only the stupidity of extreme conservatism or a thoroughly provincial point of view can account for their failure to yield, unless we are to suppose that more sinister forces were at work.... On the eve of his sailing for Europe December 2 President Wilson included in his address to a joint session of Congress another eloquent appeal for the submission of the Federal Suffrage Amendment."[117] She described the mass meeting of the suffrage war workers on December 8 at the National Theater in Washington arranged by Miss Mabel Willard with the following program: Mrs. Catt, the national president, in the chair; Dr. Anna Howard Shaw, chairman Woman's Committee of National Council of Defense; Mrs. William Gibbs McAdoo, chairman National Woman's Liberty Loan Committee; Mrs. Josephus Daniels, member National War Work Council, Y. W. C. A.; Miss Jane Delano, director Department of Nursing, American Red Cross; Mrs. Charles L. Tiffany, representing Community War Work and Women's Oversea Hospitals; Mrs. F. Louis Slade, of Young Women's Department, Y. M. C. A.; Mrs. Raymond Robins, president National Women's Trade Union League; Miss Hannah Black, Munitions Worker. An overflow meeting was held and strong resolutions for the amendment were adopted at both and sent to each Senator.

Resolutions calling on every Senator to vote for submission of the amendment were adopted by twenty-five State Legislatures during January and February, 1919, and the gaining of Presidential suffrage in Vermont, Indiana and Wisconsin that winter increased hope. The suffrage Democrats were desirous of taking one more vote before going out of power. Mrs. Park's report said: "On petition of twenty-two Senators, a Democratic caucus on suffrage was held on February 5, the first since the United States entered the war. On a motion to adjourn, the suffragists without proxies defeated the "antis," who voted proxies, by 22 to 16. On a resolution recommending that the Democratic Senators support the Federal Amendment, twenty-two voted in the affirmative and when ten had voted in the negative, those ten were allowed by Senator Thomas S. Martin (Va.), Democratic floor leader, to withdraw their votes in order that he might declare that, as the vote stood 22 to 0, a quorum had not voted and the resolution was lost! This decision was, of course, most irregular and unfair but it afforded a good illustration of the kind of tactics used by the opponents.